"Virtual Learning and Beyond"

INFORMATION-SEEKING PRACTICES AND LEARNING STYLES OF UNIVERSITY OF THE

PHILIPPINES OPEN UNIVERSITY (UPOU) STUDENTS

Jovett Maniego Lopez

MDC graduate, UP Open University
Copyright November 2008 by JMLopez ; UPOU-MDC

ABSTRACT

The research determined the learning and teaching style preferences of 200 UPOU students
as well as assessed these preferences relation to their information-seeking behavior. Selfadministered questionnaires, delivered both printed and online using Survey Monkey, were
answered by the students from 15 July to 30 September 2008.

Learning style indicators showed that most (72%) of the respondents preferred the visual type
of sensory information while majority (56%) were reflective learners. They were mixture of
intuitive and sensing learners and preferred learning and organizing information from general to
specific (deductive) 138 (69%) as opposed to inductive 62 (31%). However, more (56%) were
sequential learners rather than global learners (44%). Their Grasha-Reichmann Student
Learning Styles Scales (GRSLSS) indicated that most (33% and 30.5% respectively) of them
were collaborative-independent learners who preferred group discussion and independence in
studying.

Majority (63.5% and 45.5% respectively) also preferred a facilitator-type of teacher and Type 4
teaching style because these encouraged them to have experiential learning. Convenience and
flexibility were main reasons for enrolling via distance education (DE) mode. Thus, in seeking
information, all (100%) preferred to use the Internet and electronic media, with almost 84%
daily usage and 76% of them spent more than three hours using these media.

The premise that learning and teaching style preferences were related to the students
information-seeking behavior was supported by respondents answers to the open-ended

|Page2
questions. Although this was not statistically tested, information-seeking was related to the
convenience and use of information resources, followed by the seeker's personal knowledge,
selection of information, and course requirements. Problems encountered in seeking
information were time constraints, and the availability, credibility, and approach of information
sources.

Results may be considered in preparing course modules and in delivering lessons and
discussions by distance learning.

|Page3

INTRODUCTION

Distance Education (DE) has traversed four to five 'generations' of technology in its history print, audio/video broadcasting, audio/video teleconferencing, computer aided instruction, elearning / online-learning, computer broadcasting/web-casting/webinars, etc. Increased in
information and communication resources has dramatically revolutionized the learning and
teaching experiences of distant learners. The establishment of virtual environment from
conservative correspondence has given a threshold of convenience for online and distance
education. As such, e-learning has led to many possible ways of interacting and communicating
as well as to preferential learning and information seeking.

The idea that people learn differently is venerable and probably had its origin with the ancient
Greeks (Wratcher, Morrison, Riley & Scheirton, 1997). For many years, educators have noticed
that some students prefer certain methods of learning more than others. These dispositions,
referred to as learning styles (LS), form a student's unique learning preference, influence
information-seeking styles, and aid teachers in planning group and individualized instruction
especially in a distance education (DE) program.

One such DE program is that offered by the Philippines Open University (UPOU). The UPOU,
which was established on 23 February 1995 as UP Systems fifth constituent university,
provides education opportunities to individuals aspiring for higher education and improving their
qualifications, especially those who are unable to take advantage of traditional modes of
education.

UPOU has drastically shifted its mode of learning and teaching over the years catering
information delivery and communication electronically. Students are encouraged to study at
their own pace and own independent learning style with the given learning packages i.e. printed
manuals, audiovisual materials, CD-ROMs. Learning materials are designed in such a way that

|Page4
these require a specific time period to finish, conforming to semester schedule. Even online
library has been made available for the enrolled students to access information for course work.

Interaction is an important requisite for UPOU learning, Figure 1 clearly illustrates each of the
variables that interact and affect one another. However, aside from this interplay, there are
other important factors necessary for learning in a distance education setting:

Effective pedagogy and teaching strategies

Close monitoring of student performance and fostering one-to-one interactions

(Holmberg, 1998)

Collaboration and interaction among learners

Use

of

multimedia/ICT

that

are

appropriate

in

meeting

learning

objectives

(Reeves,1998)

Figure 1: Teaching and Learning roles at UPOU

Statement of the Problem

As UPOU students become accustomed to the changes and challenges posed by evolving
learning environment, patterns of information use, information-seeking behaviors and learning
styles are worthy of investigation. Most studies conducted on information use and behaviors of
students were done in their specific learning environment. Learning style information gives

|Page5
students a greater appreciation of their strengths and helps them become more deliberate in
their learning.

This research was conducted primarily to study and identify UPOU students preferential
learning and teaching styles and if these preferences had any relation to their informationseeking practices.

Objectives of the Study

The general objective of the study was to determine the learning and teaching preferences of
the DE students and its relation on their information-seeking behavior. Specifically, it aimed to:
1. Determine the profile of the UPOU distant learners;
2. Identify the learning styles of the distant learners;
3. Identify the teaching style preferences of the distant learners;
4. Determine the information-seeking behavior of the distant learners in terms of source of
information, frequency and amount of time spent in information-seeking; and
5. Identify the factors and problems affecting their information-seeking behavior.

Analytical Framework of the Study

This study presumed that preferences for learning and teaching styles influenced the
information-seeking behavior of students in a distance mode of learning (Figure 2). Thus,
findings would be beneficial to the faculty in designing various ways of course delivery and
online interaction to meet high-end quality education.

|Page6

Learning styles and

teaching style preference of
learners
Learning Styles
Processing
Intrapersonal or reflective learner
Interpersonal or active learner
Input
Visual (demo, pictures, diagrams, chart)
Verbal (written or spoken language)
Perception
Sensing
Intuitive
Organization
Inductive
Deductive
Understanding
Sequential
Global
Grasha-Reichmann Student Learning
Styles Scales
Competitive students
Collaborative students
Avoidant students
Participant students
Dependent students
Independent students
Teaching Style Preference
(Grasha, 1996)
Preference for teachers
Expert
Formal Authority
Personal Model
Facilitator
Delegator
Preferred teaching style
Type 1 Teacher
Type 2 Teacher
Type 3 Teacher
Type 4 Teacher

Socio-demographic
characteristics of learners

Gender
(Male =Female)
Program/ Degree
(Undergrad, Masters,
Post-baccalaureate,
Non-formal courses)
Age
Category 0:
Age 16-19 yrs
Category 1:
Age 20-25 yrs
Category 2:
Age 26-30 yrs
Category 3:
Age 30-39 yrs
Category 4:
Age 40-49 yrs
Category 5:
Age 50-60 yrs
Working or not
Profession
Years enrolled
1 sem to 1 year-half
2 years
3 years
4 years or more

Information-seeking of learners

Preferred sources of information

Library books, journals and publications
Newspapers and Magazines
Television and video clips
Radio
Interviews and surveys
Computer and the Internet
Frequency of use of information
sources
1,2,3 x month,
Almost daily / weekly
Not at all
Amount of time spent in information
seeking
<1 hr, 2hrs, 3hrs or more, not at all

Factors influencing information seeking

Convenience, speed and time
restrictions (Internet)
Knowledge of services and
sources
Course requirements
Academic Staff Help and
Recommendation (i.e. professor,
tutor, library staff
Fellow students' Help and Advice
Problems Encountered
Time-constraints and inconvenience
Availability of resources
Credibility of information source

Figure 2. Analytical framework of the study

Learning style preferences
Keefe (1989 as cited in Swanson, 1995) defined learning style as the composite of
characteristic cognitive, affective and psychological factors that serve as relatively stable
indicators of how a learner perceives, interacts with and responds to the learning environment.
However, Sternberg (1994) stated that "a style is a preferred way of using ones abilities. It is
not itself an ability but rather a preference".

According to Coggins (1988), preferred learning style is influential on students completion of

the external degree programs in distance education. Other reasons may include some distance
learners do not have effective learning strategies (Ackerman and Woltz, 1994), and some cited
that either the telecourse orientation and testing schedules were not convenient, or the pace of

|Page7
the telecourse was not appropriate, such as too fast, too slow, too hard, or too easy
(Minich,1998).

Learning styles can be categorized as follows (Felder, 1993; Grasha and Reichmann, 1974):
a. Processing Students learn best and process information by either working alone
(reflective or intrapersonal learner) or working with other fellow students (active or
interpersonal learner)
b. Input Students perceive information using senses either by visual (using demo, flow
chart, diagrams, pictures) or verbal (written or spoken language)
c. Perception Students learn and perceive information either by being sensitive (sensing)
or intuitive
d. Organization Students learn and organized information either from general to specific
(Deductive) or specific to general (Inductive)
e. Understanding Students

learn and understands information either in sequentially

(understands information in linear steps, with each step following logically from the
previous one) or globally (learn in large jumps, absorbing material almost randomly
without seeing connections, and suddenly "getting it")
f.

Grasha-Reichmann Student Learning Styles Scales (GRSLSS) focus on student

attitudes toward learning, classroom activities, teachers, and peers rather than studying
the relationships among methods, student style, and achievement. These blend
characteristics of students learning styles may evolve overtime.
Need authority figure
Independent study
Independent
Students
Self-paced instruction

Dependent
Students
Teacher-students as
Source of structure/guidance

Performance-driven
Competitive
Students
Focus on recognition on
academic accomplishment

6 GRSLSS
Group discussions
Collaborative
Students
Lectures, group projects

Like class work

Overwhelmed by class
activities
Avoidant
Students

Participant
Students
Meet teacher expectations

Figure 3: Grasha-Reichmann Student Learning Styles Scales (GRSLSS)

|Page8
The GRSLSS seemed ideal for assessing student learning preferences in a distance learning
setting (Hruska-Riechmann and Grasha, 1982; Grasha, 1996). The scales addressed one of
the key distinguishing features of a distance class, the relative absence of social interaction
between instructor-student and student-student.

The styles described above referred to a blend of characteristics that apply to all students
(Grasha, 1996). Each person has some of each of the learning styles. Ideally one would have a
balance of all the learning style preferences which are likely to evolve over time as one learns
or meets new experiences. Nevertheless, Lockitt (1997) stressed that there is no single
learning style that will be perfect for every individual, since human beings are complex.

Teaching Style Preferences

Teacher preferences, on the other hand, included the preference for teachers and their
teaching styles (Grasha 1996). Below is the classification of student's preference for teachers
(Figure 4).
Expert

Formal Authority

Possesses knowledge
and expertise in the
subject; concerned with
transmitting information;
strives to demonstrate
expertise to students and
thus maintain own status

Possesses status because of

role as a teacher; concerned
with the correct, acceptable and
standard ways of doing things
and with providing feedback;
likely to establish learning
goals, expectations and rules of
conduct

Personal Model
Believes in teaching by persona
example; oversees, guides and
irects by showing how to do thin
and encouraging students to
observe and emulate

Delegator
STUDENT

Perceives role as a
resource to be called
upon by students;
expects students to
work autonomously
and independently.

Facilitator
Guides, supports and encourages
students to develop themselves;
encourages asking questions and
exploring options; develops
initiative and responsibility; works
with students on projects in a
consultative fashion

Figure 4: Grasha-Reichmann Student's Teachers Preference

|Page9
Teaching Styles were also categorized as: (Grasha 1996)

Type 1 Teacher - focuses on personal development of students; prefers group

discussion

Type 2 Teacher - focuses on transmission of knowledge; prefers traditional

lecture

Type 3 Teacher - focuses on promoting competence and productivity;

prefers labs and workshops

Type 4 Teacher - encourages experiential learning; emphasizes facilitating

learning

Socio-demographic Characteristics
The socio-demographic data of the respondents included gender, age, program and degree
currently enrolled in, years enrolled in UPOU, if working or not, and profession. These variables
linked patterns of information-seeking behavior according to their preferred learning
experience.

Information-seeking Behavior
A student learns by feeding himself inputs or information then processing this accordingly.
Information-seeking was defined as the initiation, selection, exploration, formulation, collection
and presentation of information (Kuhlthau, 1991, 1993) while Choo et al. (2000) have
distinguished starting, chaining, browsing, differentiating, monitoring and extracting. It was also
described as a gap in individual's knowledge in sense-making situations (Dervin and Nilan,
1986).

According to Wilson, a general model of information behavior has to include at least the
following three elements: (Wilson, 1997)

"an information need and its drivers, i.e. the factors that give rise to an individual's
perception of need;

the factors that affect the individual's response to the perception of need; and

| P a g e 10

the processes or actions involved in that response."

Today, most people access information via internet and in electronic form. The Google
phenomenon is one that recurs regarding information seeking behavior when it comes to
finding information the fastest and accessible way. The convenience of generating information
from these sources is evident not only in distant learners but almost all in general. "the
pragmatic goal of improving information access has been one of the goals of information
seeking research." (Jrvelin and Ingwersen, 2004).

Meanwhile, this information-seeking study included the preferred source of information (i.e.
books, newspapers, magazines, radio, TV, interview, computer), frequency of use of the
information sources (once/twice/thrice a month, daily or weekly), the amount of time spent for
specific information source (< 1hr to 5 hrs), factors influencing information-seeking
(convenience, knowledge of use, course requirements, faculty/fellow students advices) and the
common problems encountered when seeking information (time-constraints, inconvenience,
availability of resources, information credibility).

This studys premise is that the students learning and teaching style preferences are related to
their information-seeking practices.

METHODOLOGY
Research design
The study used a cross-sectional descriptive research by disseminating survey questions to
currently enrolled UPOU students regarding their preferential learning and teaching styles as
well as their information-seeking patterns.

Locale and Time of Study

Printed surveys were disseminated to UPOU Learning Centers (LCs) from July to September
2008. These were (LC) Los Banos, Manila and Diliman. At the same time, web links of the

| P a g e 11
same survey were sent via email to students randomly taken from the Moodle Contacts website
and from the mailing list of the LC coordinators.

Respondents and Sampling Scheme

As of 19 Sep 2008, the total number of enrolled students at UPOU is 2,302 (Office of the
University Registrar, UP Open University). Two hundred (200) respondents completed the
survey, which is about 8.7% of the total student population. Thirty (30) sets of survey forms
were given to each LCs for distribution. LC coordinators provided survey forms to any UPOU
student who came in the LC either for face to face class or for examination. The remaining
respondents have accomplished the same survey using the online Survey-Monkey software, a
revolutionary tool to create and publish custom online surveys. Initially, the respondents only
included students with age 20 to 60, and then later on added the age category 16-19 to include
Associate in Arts (AA) students who have taken the survey in online mode.

Research instrument and Data Gathering Procedure

Self-administered structured research questionnaire was produced, printed and disseminated
to LCs - Los Banos, Diliman and Manila with the help of the LC coordinators. The same survey
was administered online using Survey Monkey web links. Results of the online survey were
monitored in a daily basis. Respondents with incomplete answers were followed up by email,
chat, SMS and phone interview. For those who have no response at all, their incomplete forms
were disregarded. Filled out printed forms were compiled and inputted in the Survey Monkey by
the researcher.

Data Analysis
Data gathered were analyzed descriptively using frequencies and percentages.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Profile of the UPOU Distant Learners
The respondents (N=200) represented the 8.7% of the total enrolled population of UPOU
students. A total of 244 offshore students enrolled in UPOU as of 19 September 2008 (UPOU
Registrar, 2008). This however provided fair representation of the total UPOU population.

| P a g e 12

Majority of the 200 respondents are composed of females (64.5%) with only 71 (35.5%) males.
Their age ranged from 16 to 60 years with a mean average of 38 years, wherein 174 (87%)
were working and only 26 (13%) non-working students. Most of the respondents (91%) are
based in the Philippines and only 18 (9%) abroad. Majority (62%) have been enrolled at UPOU
for approximately one to two semesters. About half of the respondents (51%) are enrolled in
Masters program, while the rest (23.5%) are enrolled in undergraduate programs. (Table 1 and
Figures 4, 5, 6, 7).
PROFILE
Gender
Male
Female
Age
16-19
20-25
26-30
30-39
40-49
50-60
Educational attainment
Doctorate
Masters
Undergraduate
Diploma course
Certificate/ non-formal
Working
Yes
No
Learning Center Base
Philippines
Abroad
Number of years studying (years)
1 -1
2
3
4
5 or more

FREQUENCY
N=200

PERCENTAGE

71
129

35.5
64.5

13
47
52
56
25
7

6.5
23.5
26
28
12.5
3.5

1
102
47
36
14

0.5
51
23.5
18
7

174
26

87
13

183
18

91
9

124
44
21
4
7

62
22
10.5
3.5
2

Table 1. Socio-demographic profile of the respondents

| P a g e 13
60

# of Respondents

50
40
30
20
10
0
Male

Female

Working

Not working

Philippines

Abroad

Category 0: age 16-19

Category 1: age 20-25

Category 2: age 26-30

Category 3: age 30-39

Category 4: age 40-49

Category 5: age 50-60

Figure 4. Respondents' Age distribution by gender, working/non-working,

and learning center base

7%

1%

11%

4%

2%

18%
50%

22%
61%
24%
1sem-1 1/2yr
Masters

Undergrad

Diploma Courses

Certificate/Nonformal

Courses/Programs Enrolled

Figure 5. Number of Years Studying in UPOU

Number of Students Enrolled

Figure 7. Respondents' Distribution of
Enrolled Courses/Programs

2yrs

3yrs

4yrs

5yrs

Doctorate

Figure 6. Respondents' Distribution of

Enrolled Degree Programs
1
2
3

Associate in Arts
Bachelor of Arts in Multimedia Studies (BAMS)
Diploma in Computer Science

Diploma in Research and Development Management

5
6

Diploma in Science Teaching

Diploma in Mathematics Teaching

Diploma in Language and Literacy Education

Master of Development Communication

9
10
11

Master of Distance Education

Master of Public Health
Master in Hospital Administration

12

Master of Arts in Nursing

13
14

Master of Public Management

Master of Arts in Education
(Language and Literacy Education)

15

Master of Arts in Education (Social Studies)

16
17

Master in Information Systems

Master of Environment and Natural Resources Management

18
19

Doctor of Philosophy in Education

New Enterprise Planning

20

Personal Entrepreneurial Development

21
22

Introduction to E-Commerce
Professional Teaching Certification Program

Key Legend

Learning Styles of Distant Learners

Majority (56%) of the respondents preferred a learning
environment that was intrapersonal or reflective learning,
which favored the independent style learning that UPOU
caters, while close to half (44%) have still chosen
Figure 8. Preferred Learning
Environment (Processing)

interpersonal or active learning (Table 2, Figure 8). Students

| P a g e 14
preferred to learn and reflect on ideas alone rather than group work because of time availability
and constraints. Though, others felt that traditional lectures and discussion worked best for
them, facilitating experiential learning and active participation.
Most respondents (72%) preferred visual type of sensory information and only 28% were
inclined to verbal (written or spoken) information (Table
2, Figure 9). Students preferred data presented in visual
formats i.e. diagram, charts, films, demos rather than
written or spoken instructions from instructors or from
manuals. These helped students to clearly understand
Figure 9. Preferred Type of Sensory
Information

ideas and easily retain information, especially for those

who have no time to study voluminous reading materials. Thus, this inferred that reading
materials, both written and seen, either manuals or video clips/presentation, are essential to
students learning process.
Half (50.5%) of the students said they were sensing
learners while the others were intuitive learners (49.5%)
(Table 2, Figure 10). This proved that UPOU students are
mixture of factual learners and abstract or mathematical
learners, and these depend on each student's inclination
Figure 10. Information Perception

to

perceive

and

process ideas.

Students learning organization preference was deductive

(general to specific) 138 (69%) as opposed to inductive 62
(31%) (Table 2, Figure 11). Many students understood
information by getting the main concept presented in highly

Figure 11. Learning Organization

Preference

structured content rather than observing phenomena before

knowing the general concept. This also assumed that distant learners tend to organize their
thoughts in general, allowing them to quickly grasp the idea presented, with less pressure on
specific content.

| P a g e 15
However, most respondents understood information from
linear sequential steps or being Sequential Learner 112
(56%) rather than jumping into big leaps or Global learner 88
(44%) (Table 2, Figure 12). Though students generalized
ideas, students still preferred to follow a linear stepwise path
Figure 12. Student's Information
Understanding

in order to better understand ideas.

FREQUENCY
N=200

PERCENT

Intrapersonal or reflective learner (working alone)

Interpersonal or active learner (working with others)
Preferred Type Of Sensory Information
Visual (demo, pictures, diagrams, flow chart)
Verbal (written or spoken language)
Information perception

112
88

56
44

144
56

72
28

Sensing learner
Intuitive learner
Learning organization preference
Inductive
Deductive
Students information understanding
Sequential Learner
Global learner

101
99

50.5
49.5

62
138

31
69

112
88

56
44

STYLE INDICATORS
Processing (Preferred Learning Environment)

Table 2. Learning Style Indicators of the students

With GRSLSS, majority of the respondents
considered themselves as collaborative (33%),
followed by independent (30.5%), participant
(18%), and competitive (13.5%).

Few were

avoidant students (1%) who observed silently,

Figure 13. Grasha-Reichmann

and minimally participated in group discussion.

Student Learning Styles Scales

(Table 3, Figure 13).

GRASHAREICHMANN
SCALES
Collaborative
Independent
Participant
Competitive
Dependent
Avoidant

FREQUENCY
N=200
66
61
36
27
8
2

PERCENT
33
30.5
18
13.5
4
1

Table 3. Grasha-Reichmann Student Learning Styles Scales of the Students

| P a g e 16

Following the style indicators presented, the study inferred that the respondents were mixture
of sensing and intuitive learners who preferred independent learning style (intrapersonal and
reflective learner) due to self-paced instruction and time management, and still recognized the
need for group discussion (Collaborative learner) where concepts are presented in a deductive
manner (general to specific) following a sequential (linear) steps. Thus, discussion forums are
advisable in a distance education learning where interaction with instructor and among students
takes place. Being visually inclined, UPOU students considered that presentation of information
can be done in practical ways i.e. video-streaming of lectures, summarizing lectures into power
point slides, etc.

Teaching Style Preference of the Distance Learners

Many (63.5%) preferred teachers who are
facilitators

followed

by

those

(37%)

who

preferred experts. Others (32.5%) preferred

personal models and some (20%) preferred
formal authority while few (17.5%) preferred
Figure 14. Students
Teacher Preference by Grasha (1996)

delegator (Table 4, Figure 14).

Most (45.5%) respondents preferred teacher

type is the Type 4. Others (21.5%) preferred
Type 1 teacher and some (21%) favored
Type-3 teacher. Few (12%) favored Type 2
teacher (Table 4, Figure 15).
Figure 15. Students Preferred Teaching
Styles by Grasha (996)

| P a g e 17

STUDENTS TEACHER PREFERENCE

Expert
Formal Authority
Personal Model
Facilitator
Delegator
PREFERRED TEACHING STYLES
Type 1 Teacher - focused on personal
development of students; prefers group
discussion
Type 2 Teacher - focuses on transmission
of knowledge; prefers traditional lecture
Type 3 Teacher - focuses on promoting
competence and productivity; prefers labs
and workshops
Type 4 Teacher - encourages experiential
learning; emphasizes facilitating learning

FREQUENCY
74
40
65
127
35

N=200

%
37
20
32.5
63.5
17.5

43

21.5

24

12.0

42

21.0

91

45.5

Table 4. Grasha (1996) Students Teachers and Teaching Style Preferences

Respondents preferred teachers who guides, supports and encourages students to develop
themselves; encourages asking questions and exploring options; develops initiative and
responsibility; works with students on projects in a consultative fashion Facilitator-type of
teachers and Type-4 teachers. One primary reason of having FICs and tutors as well as
sectioning for huge classes is to maintain quality discussion and facilitate or focus transfer of
learning to each student using various communication i.e. web forums and email messaging.
However, there are still some students who feel that some FICs are available enough to
support all their queries. On the other hand, students are also concerned of teachers who offer
experiential learning and still maintain their expertise and authority, which many believe that UP
system holds.

Information-Seeking Behavior of the Distant Learners

All respondents (100%) preferred using computer and the internet among all information
resources, and majority (84%) used it almost daily. Majority (78%) also used it for almost three
or more hours (Tables 5, 6, 7 and Figure 16, 17). This confirmed that one of the main reasons
of DE mode is convenience and flexibility of schedule. The use of search engines provides
websites or links for specific topics inquired. Its accessibility and popularity helps one save time
and effort rather than going to library. Thus, UPOU has offered students the Virtual Library;
however, limited books are available.

| P a g e 18

PREFERENCE

Many (85%) still used library books, journals and

publications at least once a month (29.5%),

INFORMATION RESOURCE
%

Library books, journals and

publications
Newspapers and Magazines

170

85

spending three or more hours (21.5%) when

151

75.5

seeking information. This indicated that credibility

Television and video clips

150

75

Radio

68

34

Interviews and surveys

Computer and the Internet

109

54.5

200

100

and approach of information matter in seeking

information.

Table 5. Information Resource

Preferences of Students

INFORMATION
RESOURCE
Library books, journals
and publications
Newspapers and
Magazines
Television and video
clips
Radio
Interviews and surveys
Computer and the
Internet

(Tables 5, 6, 7 and Figure 16, 17)

FREQUENCY USAGE
1 x a mon

2 x a mon

3 x a mon

weekly
%

daily
%

59

29.5

12

21

10.5

51

21.5

30

15

18

3.5

11

5.5

55

27.5

63

31.5

24

12

11

5.5

2.5

30

15

85

42.5

11

15

8.5
7.5

38

10

2
5

17

13

1
6.5

63

5.5
31.5

19
3.5

0.5

1.5

27

13.5

168

84

Table 6. Frequency Usage of Preferred Information Resources of Students

On the other hand, many (75.5% and 75% respectively) preferred newspapers/magazines and
TV/video clips as resource of information indicating that convenience in information-seeking
and visual sensory of learning are important factors considered by distant learners. About
31.5% and 42.5% respectively, said that newspapers/magazines and TV/video clips were
utilized on a daily basis. About 29% spent 1 hour for reading newspaper and magazines and
approximately 28% spent 3 or more hours watching TV and video clips when seeking
information (Tables 5, 6, 7 and Figure 16, 17).

| P a g e 19
250
200
150
100
50
0
Library books, New spapers Television and
journals and and Magazines
video clips
publications

1 x month

2 x month

Radio

Interview s and
surveys

3 x month

Computer and
the Internet

weekly

daily

Figure 16. Frequency Usage of the Preferred Information Resources of Students

Many of the respondents (54.5%) used interviews and surveys as viable source of information
at least once a month frequency (31.5%) and less than an hour time allotment (22.5%). Though
more than half of the respondents indicated the use of this media, its popularity and credibility
do not appeal to students as shown by their less time usage (Tables 5, 6, 7 and Figure 16, 17).
AMOUNT OF TIME USAGE
INFORMATION
RESOURCE

Library books,
journals and
publications
Newspapers and
Magazines
Television and video
clips
Radio
Interviews and
surveys
Computer and the
Internet

<1 HR

1 HR

2 HRS

3 HRS >

36

18

35

17.5

54

27

43

21.5

53

26.5

58

29

30

15

13

6.5

23

11.5

40

35

17.5

58

28

24

12

22

11

13

6.5

16

45

22.5

35

17.5

15

7.5

12

33

16.5

152

76

Table 7. Amount of Time Spent in Preferred Information Resources of Students

250
200
150
100
50
0
Library books, New spapers Televis ion and
journals and
and
video clips
publications
Magaz ines

<1hr

1 hr

Radio

2 hrs

Interview s
and s urv ey s

Computer and
the Internet

3 hrs>

Figure 17. Amount of Time Usage of the Preferred Information Resources of Students

| P a g e 20

Only 34% of the respondents preferred the use of radio with 19% daily usage and less than an
hour time usage (12%) (Tables 5, 6, 7 and Figure 16, 17). This revealed that the popularity of
radio being a preferred information resource decreased given that the advent of computer age
opened more and more opportunities in seeking and finding information.

Factors and Problems Affecting Information-Seeking Behavior (ISB)

Three open-ended questions were given to respondents regarding their opinions on the factors
and problems affecting the ISB. Students were asked to rank the various factors that affected
their information-seeking i.e. Convenience, speed and time restrictions, Knowledge of services
and sources, Course Requirements, Influence of Academic staff (professor, librarian, FIC), and
fellow students opinions and advices.

Results showed that convenience ranked as the highest priority in information-seeking. Almost
half (99 out of 200 respondents) agreed convenience, speed and time restrictions influenced
their ISB. Thus, in the study made by Quimbo & Bautista (2007), it also revealed that
convenience is the main reason for preference of particular mode of learning while the
preferred learning mode is mixed mode (both face to face and online). Sixty-six out of 200
agreed that the second influential factor was the knowledge of services and sources of
information. Students, other than convenience, also considered easiness, familiarity and
accountability of services when seeking information. About 64 students ranked Course
RANKING
RESULTS

INFLUENTIAL FACTORS IN
INFORMATION-SEEKING

1st

2nd

3rd

4th

5th

No.
N=200

1st

Convenience, speed and time

restrictions (Internet)

99

45

20

13

23

200

2nd

Knowledge of services and sources

45

66

45

17

27

200

3rd

Course requirements

56

38

64

17

25

200

18

21

36

90

33

198

17

28

44

97

195

4th
5th

Academic staff help and

Recommendation (i.e. professor, tutor,
library staff)
Fellow students' help and advise

Table 8. Influential factors in Information Seeking of Students

| P a g e 21
Requirements as third influential factor in seeking information. With the given course guides
and requirements, students matched their information needs according to the requisites of their
subjects. It may either make students be overwhelmed with voluminous readings or be lagged
behind on just one reference material. About 90 out of 198 respondents said that academic
staff influenced their ISB, ranked as fourth factor considered. FICs and tutors authority and
figure inspired students to further their study and discussion in forums, thus experiential
learning is manifested. About 97 out of 195 respondents agreed that their fellow students
advices ranked as fifth influential factor in their ISB. Though exchange of ideas among students
were observed, chances of influencing ISB are minimal and if so, were due to competitive and
collaborative group discussion and requisites of the course. Other factors specified were
influence of work colleague, society or community with idea on discussed subject matter,
serendipity or chances of finding viable information related to the subject matter, and the
course discussion/website.
PROBLEMS

FREQUENCY
N=200
165
134
90

PERCENTAGE

Time-constraints and inconvenience

82.5
Availability of resources
67.0
Credibility of information source
45.0
Table 9. Common Problems Encountered during Information-Seeking

Most respondents (82.5%) agreed that time constraints and inconvenience were most common
problems encountered during information seeking, specifically personal time-management.
The study of Quimbo and Bautista (2007) also showed that performance of UPOU students are
not affected by shift in purely online mode of instruction but rather both personal reasons (timemanagement and discipline) and DE mode characteristics i.e.

being isolated from other

students. Either one had difficulty in adjusting to the pacing and autonomy in studying or still
preferred traditional classroom-style discussion. Other specified problems were the lack of
knowledge on the subject matter, media constraints and downtime of learning portal, approach
or directive of information resource, lack of FIC support, and limited access to information on
some topics.

| P a g e 22

Learning and Teaching Styles and Information-Seeking Behavior

Learning style and choice of DE

The students were also asked if their learning styles influenced their choice of distance
education at UPOU rather than the residential mode. Out of 200, majority (59.5%) answered
yes while 36% said no (Table 10). Most of the yes answered (43.6%) said that their choice of
DE was mainly because of flexible environment and convenience. Forty-one (41%) also
preferred independent style of learning which DE caters while other (6.7%) considered DE as
challenging, stimulating and develops professionalism.

Learning style and information-seeking behavior

The students were also asked if their learning styles influenced their information-seeking
behavior. Out of 200, most of the students (88%) said yes and only 6.5% said no (Table 10).
Most (23.8%) who have agreed said that independent learning style follows independence in
seeking information. Others (19.3%) pointed that they were technology-driven and sought
learning style convenience. About 18.7% of the yes answer agreed that they considered their
information perception/organization and understanding when seeking information, from general
to specific or vice versa, and global or sequential learning. Others (9.6%) stated that their
sensory information preference mattered in seeking information. Some (3.9%) indicated their
dependence to learning mode and modalities influenced their ISB. Still some (3.4%) preferred
collaborative-participative learning experience when seeking information, thus group discussion
were noted.

UPOU Matching of Reaching Mode and Student Needs

The students were also asked if UPOU learning mode and modalities matched their needs.
Most (85.5%) have agreed and only 9.5% disagreed (Table 10).

Many (20.6%) who have agreed said that the UPOU DE mode have flexible learning mode,
have reasonable requirements and deadlines. Others (19.2%) said that UPOU promotes

| P a g e 23
independent and challenging learning mode of DE which favored them. About 14.6% said that
the reading materials, course guides and videos were sufficient while others (12.8%) said that
the UPOU web portal / Moodle offered convenience and accessibility and user-friendly
interface. About 9.9% supported the discussion boards and forums served as motivation for
students to further their study while others 7.6% agreed that their FICs and tutors were very
supportive.

On the contrary, students who have difficulties in UPOU modalities cited their problems:
unavailability or limited resources of information, downtime of UPOU Moodle/IVLE website,
unavailability of FICs, rescheduling of F2F and exam dates, course materials flaws (i.e. typo
errors, blurred copies, damaged DVDs/CDs, etc), inactive web discussions, unreasonable
requirements i.e. immersion, self-discipline and time management. However, many feel that
apart from the technical difficulties experienced, lack of time management and self-discipline
are major contingencies why students fail in meeting the deadlines or drop subjects enrolled.

The blended learning environment, both F2F and online, helped students adapt in UPOU DE
mode. Thus as mentioned by Grasha, that a balance of all the learning style preferences are
likely to evolve over time as one learns or meet new experiences. This transitory stage from
residential-mode to virtual-mode marked the development of student's learning style from
dependent to participative learning and progress to competitive-collaborative-independent
learning style. This only indicated that learning styles of students are mixture of various styles
and that no single learning style perfectly match each individual. One's learning style is
manifested on how students are trained from previous learning environment or even in work
setting.

| P a g e 24

1) Does LS influence choice of DE?

Yes
No
Not Applicable
Reasons for Yes Answer
Flexible environment (convenience)
Prefer individual study (independence)
Challenging/stimulating, improves/motivates/develops
professionalism
No reason/Not applicable
2) Does LS influence the way one seek information?
Yes
No
Not Applicable

Frequency
N=200

Percentage
%

119
72
9

59.5
36
4.5

52
49
8

43.6
41.1
6.7

10

8.4

176
13
11

88
6.5
5.5

Reasons for Yes Answer

Independence in seeking info
42
Dependence to Expert / guides/ FICs/students
7
Technology driven(i.e. internet) and convenience
34
Collaborative-participative learning preference
6
Sensory information preference
17
Information perception, understanding and organization
33
Not sure / Not applicable
32
3) Does UPOU learning mode and modalities match students needs?
Yes
171
No
19
Not Applicable
10
Reasons for Yes Answer
Course guides and reading materials/videos are sufficient
25
Flexible time / Reasonable requirements/deadlines
35
Portal/website accessible / user-friendly; convenience
22
FICs, professors are supportive
13
Forums, Discussion and F2F motivate students
17
Promotes independent style of learning; challenging
33
Table 10. Factors affecting information-Seeking behavior

23.8
3.9
19.3
3.4
9.6
18.7
18.1
85.5
9.5
0.5
14.6
20.6
12.8
7.6
9.9
19.2

Having matched the reaching mode and modalities of UPOU and students need, the study
supported the characteristics of DE by UPOU which were as follows: (UPOU 2003)

1. The learner is physically separated from the teacher.

2. Learning is individualized. Distance education requires an independent self-learning
style on the part of the student. Students study in their own time and place.
3. Learning packages make use of multiple media such as print, audio, video, computer
programs and the internet.

| P a g e 25
4. Two-way communication between teacher and student exists through printed
communication, electronic mail, telephone, teleconferencing, computer conferencing
and even video conferencing.
5. Communication technologies are a very important aspect of distance education since
these are used for various purposes (i.e., as a tool for administrative networking, as a
facility for two-way communication between teacher and student, between tutor and
student, between the University's support services and the student, and as an aid for
teaching and learning)

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Profile of the UPOU distant learners

UPOU distant learners composed of students with age ranging from 16 to 60 years,
having most population on age 20 to 40 years, mostly belonging to working class.
2. Learning styles of the UPOU distant learners
Most UPOU distant learners preferred reflective/intrapersonal learning
UPOU students were mixture of collaborative-independent learners
Visual information was preferred by students rather than verbal
Students perceived information either by facts (sensing learners) or
discovering possibilities or relationships (intuitive learners).
Most students organized information from general to specific (deductive)
however understood information presented from sequential or linear
steps (sequential learners)
GRSLSS of UPOU students showed collaborative-independent style of
learners.
3. Teaching style preference of the distant learners
Students preferred expert-facilitator-type of teachers who can provide experiential
learning and transfer of knowledge.
4. Information-seeking behavior of the distant learners
Distant learners mostly preferred computer and the internet when seeking information,
spending almost 3 hours or more daily.
5. Factors and problems affecting information-seeking behavior
The common factor affecting information-seeking was the convenience and use of
information resources followed by the seeker's personal knowledge and discretion of
information need. Course requirements also influence ISB.
Problems encountered in seeking information were time constraints, availability,
credibility and approach of information sources, which were related to one's learningteaching style preferences.

| P a g e 26
Conclusion
The results clearly indicated that learning and teaching styles can influence information seeking
behavior and choice of DE mode of students. In spite of the many variables involved we must
also assume that information seeking behavior is even more complex especially to distant
learners where flexibility and convenience in learning are critical.

Recommendations
For Distant Learners
Knowing ones learning and teaching styles would benefit a distant learner to further enhance
his learning and studying skills. It is necessary that distance learners are aware of their
weaknesses and strengths in learning especially that they are isolated from the tutors and
classmates. It is also recommended that distance students should also assess their course
content and delivery in order for the learning environment be further improved and administered
according to the students needs.

Dickie (1999) has accounted some recommendations about distant learning experience.

Distance learners must take ownership of their learning situation by being responsible
for their learning as more independent and self-directed learners.

Distance Learning is being able to adapt to change. It poses extra challenge to acquire
essential technological skills to facilitate the intercommunicative processes involved in
learning activities.

It is within the nature of distance learning experience for distance learners to feel
convinced that being a distance learner means taking risks.

In other words, a distance learner is disciplined, that even situated in a virtual learning
environment, self-paced instruction and demanding career and lifestyle, still maintains
academic excellence and able to communicate effectively using advanced technological skills.

| P a g e 27

For educators
Distance Learning can never replaced the information delivery and interaction of traditional F2F
mode of instruction, thus educators should be aware how to maintain academic quality that
helps students remain competitive in global education. There is a definite need to develop
strategies for teaching in distance learning in order to teach effectively. Multiple modes of
delivery will facilitate teaching methods that build students inquiry and problem-solving skills as
well as their content knowledge in every subject. (OLawrence, 2007)

It is also recommended to use, if possible, multiple technologies, since those provide richer
communication than any one technology alone (Wentling et alt. 2000). Using different
technologies provides different types of interaction involving different senses and, in
consequence, it reaches a broader group of students learning preferences. It should be taken
into account that most people retain (Rief, 1993):
10% of what they read
20% of what they hear
30% of what they see
50% of what they see and hear
70% of what they say
90% of what they say and do.
However, although technology is an integral part of distance education, any successful program
must focus primarily on the instructional needs of the students rather than the technology
(OLawrence, 2007).

Educators need to make the learners feel 'at home in virtual space' so that they want to work
with others, aside from being an independent learner. Although self-pacing is important,
keeping the cohort experience is advantageous (Dickie, 1999). The visibility of the FICs is very
important as they are the online consultants of the distant learners. The interactive discussions
as well as virtual social forums stir the learner's stamina to further study, be motivated and

| P a g e 28
interact with fellow classmates. In this way, learners will always look forward establishing
connection to the virtual learning environment that UPOU administers.

With the development of media and technology, defective learning DVDs and CDs could be
minimized if slide presentations, video and audio streaming will be made available online. In
this way, students can cope up to the voluminous reading materials and still can follow on to
the schedule of the course. The availability of e-books has also been beneficial to UPOU
students; however, there are minimal concerns on updating some course materials.

With the launch of IVLE and Moodle website as the virtual learning portal of the UPOU,
technical difficulties faced by the learners should be addressed efficiently by tech-support
hotlines. Not all learners are adept to the use of computer and the internet; it is necessarily that
online instructions be accessible.

It is necessary to amass more data in the future as virtual learning progresses. There is a
definite need beyond to develop strategies for teaching in distance learning in order to teach
effectively and in order to utilize the academic freedom and excellence that the UPOU upholds.

| P a g e 29

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Ackerman, P. L., & Woltz, D. J. (1994). Determinants of learning and performance in

an associative memory/substitution task: Task constraints, individual differences,
volition, and motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86 (4), 487-515.
2. Bautista, V.A. and Quimbo, M.A. (2007). Modes of learning and performance among
UPOU graduates. The Electronic Journal on Information Systems in Developing
Countries, 32(2), 1-26. Retrieved September 2008, from
http://www.ejisdc.org/ojs2/index.php/ejisdc/article/viewFile/463/231
3. Belkin, N.J., Brooks, H.M. and Oddy, R.N. (1982) ASK for information retrieval. Journal
of Documentation, 38, 61-71.
4. Choo, C.W., Detlor, B. and Turnbull, D. (2000, February). Information seeking on the
web: an integrated model of browsing and searching. First Monday, 5(2). Retrieved
September 2008, from http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue5_2/choo/index.html
5. Coggins, C. C. (1988). Preferred learning styles and their impact on completion of
external degree programs. The American Journal of Distance Education, 2 (1), 25-37.
6. Cornelius, S. (2000). Learning Online: Models and Styles. OTIS Online Tutoring eBook. Retrieved September 2008 from http://otis.scotcit.ac.uk/onlinebook/otisT102.htm
7. Dickie, S. (1999). The Lived Experience of Being a Distance Learner. Master of
Distance Education thesis, Athabasca University. Retrieved September 2008 from
http://hdl.handle.net/2149/529
8. Eskola, E. (1998, October). University students' information seeking behavior in a
changing learning environment How are students' information needs, seeking and
use affected by new teaching methods? Information Research, 4(2). Retrieved on
September 2008, from http://informationr.net/ir/4-2/isic/eeskola.html
9. Felder, R. and Soloman, B. (n.d.). Learning styles and strategies. Retrieved
September 2008, from North Carolina State University Website:
http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/ILSdir/styles.htm
10. Felder, R.M. (1996, December). Matters of Style. ASEE Prism, 6(4), 18-23. Retrieved
September 2008 from North Carolina State University Website:
http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/Papers/LS-Prism.htm
11. Felder, R.M. (1993), "Reaching the Second Tier: Learning and Teaching Styles in
College Science Education," J. Coll. Sci. Teaching, 23(5), 286--290. Retrieved
September 2008 from North Carolina State University website:
http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/Papers/Secondtier.html

| P a g e 30
12. Fourie, I. (2006). Literature review: Learning from web information seeking studies:
some suggestions for LIS practitioners. The Electronic Library, 24(1), 20-37. Retrieved
September 2008 from
http://emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet;jsessionid=C518119ACF4EDCD
E5E0B2C84F874FD6B?Filename=Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/2630240
103.html
13. Heinstrom, J. (2003). Fast surfers, broad scanners and deep divers. Personality and
information-seeking behaviour. Turku (bo): bo Akademi University Press. Information
Research, 8(2), Review no. 079. Retrieved September 2008 from
http://dlist.sir.arizona.edu/2234/01/revs079.html
14. Houssell, H. and Smith M. (2004, May). What are the information needs of distance
learning students? Retrieved September 2008 from
http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~kjh34/Info%20511%20web%20page.htm
15. Jrvelin, K. & Ingwersen, P. (2004). "Information seeking research needs extension
toward tasks and technology". Information Research, 10(1) paper 212. Retrieved on
September 2008 from http://informationr.net/ir/10-1/paper212.html
16. Johnstone, S. and Krauth, B. (2002, July). Information literacy and the distance learner.
White Paper prepared for UNESCO, the U.S. National Commission on Libraries and
Information Science and the National Forum on Information Literacy, for use at the
Information Literacy Meeting of Experts, Prague, The Czech Republic. Retrieved
September 2008 from http://www.nclis.gov/libinter/infolitconf&meet/papers/johnstonefullpaper.pdf
17. Kuhlthau, C.C. (1991), "Inside the search process: information seeking from the users'
perspective", Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Vol. 42 No.5,
pp.361-71.
18. Kuhlthau, C.C. (1993), "A principle of uncertainty for information seeking", Journal of
Documentation, Vol. 49 No.4, pp.339-55.
19. University of Guelph. (n.d.). Learning Styles. Teaching Support Services. Retrieved
September 2008 from University of Guelph Website:
http://www.tss.uoguelph.ca/resources/idres/packagels.html
20. Litzinger, T., Lee, S.H., Wise, J. and Felder R. (2007, October). A Psychometric study of
the index of learning styles. Journal of Engineering Education, 96(4), 309-319 Retrieved
from September 2008 from
http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/ILSdir/ILS_Validation(JEE2007).pdf
21. Logan, K. and Thomas, P. (2002, June). Learning Styles in Distance Education
Students Learning to Program. In J. Kuljis, L. Baldwin & R. Scoble (Eds). Proc. PPIG
(Vol. 14, pp.29-44). Retrieved September 2008, from http://www.ppig.org/papers/14thlogan.pdf
22. Mariano, ML. and Dela Rosa, N. (2004, July). Beyond an institutionalized learning
environment: fostering interactions and learning using synchronous and asynchronous
messaging systems. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education-TOJDE, 5(3).
Retrieved September 2008, from
http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/2
7/f8/8e.pdf

| P a g e 31
23. Minich, E. (1998, spring/summer). Why do students withdraw from telecourses?
Agenda, 16
24. O'Lawrence, H. (2007). An overview of the influences of distance learning on adult
learners. Journal of Education and Human Development, 1(1). Retrieved September
2008, from http://www.scientificjournals.org/journals2007/articles/1041.htm
25. Payette, S. D. & Rieger, O. Y. (1998). Supporting scholarly inquiry: incorporating users
in the design of the digital library. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 24(2), 121129. Retrieved September 2008, from the Science Direct Website.
26. Randall, V. (1995). The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, First Year Law Students and
Performance, 26 Cumb. L. Rev. 63 101. Retrieved September 2008 from
http://academic.udayton.edu/LegalEd/online/study/mbti00c.htm#N_40_
27. Reichmann, S. W., & Grasha, A. F. (1974). A rational approach to developing
and assessing the construct validity of a student learning style scale instrument."
Journal of Psychology, 87, 213-223.
28. Rief, SF (1993). How to Reach and Teach ADD/ADHD Children: Practical Techniques,
Strategies, and Interventions for Helping Children with Attention Problems and
Hyperactivity. The Center for Applied Research in Education, 1993. p53
29. Sternberg, R. J. (1994). Allowing for thinking styles. Educational Leadership,
Volume 52 number 3, November 1994, pp. 36-40.
30. Taylor, J.C. (2003, June). The Fifth Generation of Distance Education. Translation in the
Chinese Journal of Open Education Research, 3, 25 27.
31. Wentling et al (2000). E-Learning: A review of Literature. Knowledge and Learning
Systems group at the University of Illinois at Urbana Campaign. Retrieved on
September 2008 from http://learning.ncsa.uiuc.edu/papers/elearnlit.pdf

| P a g e 32
APPENDIX
Survey Questionnaire
1. Which age category are you in?
Age 20-25
26-30
30-39
40-49
50-60
Learning Center? __________

Sex? _______ Working or not? _______

2. Profession / Occupation ___________

3. Specify which program and degree you are in.
Program =
Degree =
4. Courses/ subjects / electives
Last sem =

Years Enrolled =

Current sem =

5. Select preferred information source and the frequency and amount of time usage
INFO. SOURCE

PREFERENCE
(Yes or No)

FREQUENCY OF USE
(1,2,3 x month, Almost daily /
weekly, not at all)

AMOUNT OF TIME USAGE

(<1 hr, 2hrs, 3hrs or >)

Library books, journals

and publications
Newspapers and
Magazines
Television and video
clips
Radio
Interviews and surveys
Computer and the
Internet

6. What factors influence you in seeking information? (RANK - 1st to 5th)

_________Convenience, speed and time restrictions (Internet)
_________Knowledge of services and sources
_________Course requirements
_________Academic Staff Help and Recommendation (i.e. professor, tutor, library staff)
_________Fellow students' Help and Advice
7. What are the common problems you encountered when seeking information on your studies or
research? (Check all that apply)
___Time-constraints and inconvenience
___Availability of resources
___Credibility of information source
Other (please specify) ___________________________
8. PROCESSING
Please check your preferred learning environment.
I learn best and prefer processing info...
____INTRAPERSONAL or REFLECTIVE LEARNER (working alone)
____INTERPERSONAL or ACTIVE LEARNER (working with others)
9. INPUT
What type of sensory information is most effectively perceived?
___ Visual (demo, pictures, diagrams, flow chart)
___ Verbal (written or spoken language)

| P a g e 33
10. PERCEPTION
I am more of a...
* Sensing learners tend to like learning facts, often like solving problems by well-established methods
and dislike complications and surprises, patient with details and good at memorizing facts and doing
hands-on (laboratory) work, don't like courses that have no apparent connection to the real world.
* Intuitive learners often prefer discovering possibilities and relationships, like innovation and dislike
repetition, better at grasping new concepts and are often more comfortable than sensors with
abstractions and mathematical formulations, intuitors don't like "plug-and-chug" courses that involve
a lot of memorization and routine calculations.
___Sensing Learner
___Intuitive Learner
11. ORGANIZATION
Learning organization preference:
I learn best through:
___Inductive (prefer presentations that proceed from the specific to the general)
___Deductive (prefer presentations that go from the general to the specific)
12. UNDERSTANDING
How students progress to understanding information?
I am more of a...
* Sequential learners tend to gain understanding in linear steps, with each step following logically
from the previous one; tend to follow logical stepwise paths in finding solutions; may not fully
understand the material but they can nevertheless do something with it (like solve the homework
problems or pass the test) since the pieces they have absorbed are logically connected; They may
know a lot about specific aspects of a subject but may have trouble relating them to different aspects
of the same subject or to different subjects.
* Global learners tend to learn in large jumps, absorbing material almost randomly without seeing
connections, and then suddenly "getting it." They may be able to solve complex problems quickly or
put things together in novel ways once they have grasped the big picture, but they may have difficulty
explaining how they did it; strongly global learners who lack good sequential thinking abilities may
have serious difficulties until they have the big picture.
____Sequential Learner
____Global Learner
13. I strongly believe I belong to the group of:
* Competitive students
learn material in order to perform better than others. They like to receive recognition for their
accomplishments and prefer both teacher-centered instruction and also group tasks where they can
lead or demonstrate their pre-eminence
* Collaborative students
feel that they can learn by sharing ideas and talents. They like to co-operate with the teacher and to
work with others. This leads to a preference for group work, projects, seminars and lectures that
feature small group discussion
* Avoidant students
are uninterested in classroom learning and participate reluctantly. They prefer large group situations
where they can remain anonymous and do not like enthusiastic teachers.
* Participant students
are good citizens and enjoy participating in as much as they can. Typically, they are eager to take all
the options that they can and to fully meet all the requirements. They prefer participative exercises,
including lectures that allow student participation, informal discussions and reading assignments

| P a g e 34
* Dependent students
show little intellectual curiosity and learn only what is required. They look for structure and specifics
and prefer teacher-centered classroom situations, good handouts or notes to copy and clear
deadlines and
instructions for assignments
* Independent students
like to think for themselves and are confident in their learning abilities. They often like to work alone
and prefer student-centered methods, self-paced instruction and assignments that give students a
chance to think independently.
_____Competitive _____ Collaborative _____ Avoidant ______Participant
____ Dependent _____ Independent
TEACHING STYLE PREFERENCE by GRASHA (1996)
* Expert
Possesses knowledge and expertise in the subject; concerned with transmitting information; strives
to demonstrate expertise to students and thus maintain own status
* Formal Authority
Possesses status because of role as a teacher; concerned with the correct, acceptable and standard
ways of doing things and with providing feedback, both negative and positive; likely to establish
learning
goals, expectations and rules of conduct
* Personal Model
Believes in teaching by personal example; oversees, guides and directs by showing how to do things
and encouraging students to observe and emulate
* Facilitator
Guides, supports and encourages students to develop themselves; encourages asking questions
and exploring options; develops initiative and responsibility; works with students on projects in a
consultative fashion
* Delegator
Perceives role as a resource to be called upon by students; expects students to work autonomously
and independently.
14. I prefer teachers who are... (Check all that apply)
____Expert ____Formal Authority ____Personal Model ____Facilitator

____Delegator

15. Rate the type of teaching styles you think your course should be best delivered.
____Type 1 Teacher - focus on personal development of students; preferred group discussion
____Type 2 Teacher - focus on transmission of knowledge; preferred traditional lecture
____Type 3 Teacher - focus on promoting competence and productivity; preferred labs and workshops
____Type 4 Teacher - encourage experiential learning; emphasis on facilitating learning
16. Did your learning style influence your choice of distance learning at UPOU rather than the
residential mode? Yes or No. Why? In what way?
17. Does your learning style influence the way you seek out information? Yes or No? How?
18. Does the learning mode and modalities of UPOU meet or match your needs? Yes or No? Why?

/JML2008